Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen presently...only then that which is beyond is. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > -geo- A complete disinterest in anything 'outside this moment' is 'helpful'. This moment is complete, as it is. If it feels incomplete, one seeks 'something else'. The seeking 'something else', is the feeling of incompleteness. And trying to 'get away' from the moment, is also incompleteness. Attraction (seeking 'else') and repulsion (pushing away 'this'). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen presently...only then that which is beyond is. > -geo- > Geo, There is nothing beyond, there is no such thing. The 'Beyond' is a myth so called spiritual people love to decorate themselves with. In this case it is you doing that. Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > A complete disinterest in anything 'outside this moment' is 'helpful'. > > This moment is complete, as it is. > > If it feels incomplete, one seeks 'something else'. > > The seeking 'something else', is the feeling of incompleteness. > > And trying to 'get away' from the moment, is also incompleteness. > > Attraction (seeking 'else') and repulsion (pushing away 'this'). > Tim, Are you really believing that it is given to you to stay with this moment or not to stay with it ? Do you believe in free choice and in free will ? Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > > > > Geo, > > There is nothing beyond, there is no such thing. The 'Beyond' is a myth so called spiritual people love to decorate themselves with. In this case it is you doing that. > > Werner The so-called 'beyond' is closer even than 'here'. Much closer. it's 'here' without a 'there'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > > -geo- > > > > A complete disinterest in anything 'outside this moment' is 'helpful'. > > > > This moment is complete, as it is. > > > > If it feels incomplete, one seeks 'something else'. > > > > The seeking 'something else', is the feeling of incompleteness. > > > > And trying to 'get away' from the moment, is also incompleteness. > > > > Attraction (seeking 'else') and repulsion (pushing away 'this'). > > > > > Tim, > > Are you really believing that it is given to you to stay with this > moment or not to stay with it ? > > Do you believe in free choice and in free will ? > > Werner What occurs, occurs. What happens, happens. Including the above two postings. Not very interesting, not thrilling, but that is 'what is the case'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > A complete disinterest in anything 'outside this moment' is 'helpful'. > > > > > > This moment is complete, as it is. > > > > > > If it feels incomplete, one seeks 'something else'. > > > > > > The seeking 'something else', is the feeling of incompleteness. > > > > > > And trying to 'get away' from the moment, is also incompleteness. > > > > > > Attraction (seeking 'else') and repulsion (pushing away 'this'). > > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > Are you really believing that it is given to you to stay with this > moment or not to stay with it ? > > > > Do you believe in free choice and in free will ? > > > > Werner > > What occurs, occurs. > > What happens, happens. > > Including the above two postings. > > Not very interesting, not thrilling, but that is 'what is the case'. > Not very interesting, but worthy enough for a reply? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen presently...only then that which is beyond is. > -geo- Geo - There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. Period. Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that be, " is conditional. Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, totality) is not sufficient for understanding. Only being is understanding. Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply can't touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. The conditional consciousness involves a center. The conditional conscious dies. In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is time. -- Dan -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 > > > > What occurs, occurs. > > > > What happens, happens. > > > > Including the above two postings. > > > > Not very interesting, not thrilling, but that is 'what is the case'. > > > > D: Not very interesting, but worthy enough for a reply? P: Going to a graveyard and reading tombstones is more interesting than reading these posts, and no one expects a reply. But, on the other hand, tombstones don't show up in my screen. I have to get my butt off this chair and drive for miles. Why is it they build graveyards so far away from where people live? Are they afraid of death? Or what? Now that's an interesting question ) > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > A complete disinterest in anything 'outside this moment' is 'helpful'. > > This moment is complete, as it is. > > If it feels incomplete, one seeks 'something else'. > > The seeking 'something else', is the feeling of incompleteness. > > And trying to 'get away' from the moment, is also incompleteness. > > Attraction (seeking 'else') and repulsion (pushing away 'this'). Any description of any dynamics occurring within a moment, is fiction, is imagined. There is nothing occurring within this moment. Thus, this is what is. Of course, we can endlessly discuss dynamics occurring in this moment. Just as we can form images and experiences from it and of it. And we do. " As if. " Never " in actuality. " - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > > > > Geo, > > There is nothing beyond, there is no such thing. The 'Beyond' is a myth so called spiritual people love to decorate themselves with. In this case it is you doing that. > > Werner Werner - It's true that images of the beyond seem endlessly fascinating to people. I suppose because fascinating images help alleviate fears of death. Fear of death is an imagined barrier separating self from what is. Die, and be. Be without death, having died to the mind of the past. - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > -geo- Geo - There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. Period. Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that be, " is conditional. Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, totality) is not sufficient for understanding. Only being is understanding. Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply can't touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. The conditional consciousness involves a center. The conditional conscious dies. In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is time. -- Dan -- Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:28 PM Re: Re: Seeing Value - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > -geo- Geo - There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. Period. Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that be, " is conditional. Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, totality) is not sufficient for understanding. Only being is understanding. Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply can't touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. The conditional consciousness involves a center. The conditional conscious dies. In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is time. -- Dan -- Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? Anyway the condition is not for the unconditioned to " exist " - which it does, but for the inner conceptual entity not to appear consceptualy. Without a clear perception of consciousness and its limitations there is fragmentation and a part of consciousness speaks/writes as if it was the ground itself. But what happens is that what is stated/felt to be the subjective is a concept projected by the fragment. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > > > > > What occurs, occurs. > > > > > > What happens, happens. > > > > > > Including the above two postings. > > > > > > Not very interesting, not thrilling, but that is 'what is the case'. > > > > > > > D: Not very interesting, but worthy enough for a reply? > > P: Going to a graveyard and reading tombstones is more > interesting than reading these posts, and no one expects > a reply. But, on the other hand, tombstones don't > show up in my screen. I have to get my butt off this > chair and drive for miles. Why is it they build > graveyards so far away from where people live? Are they > afraid of death? Or what? Now that's an interesting > question ) > > Folks don't like looking at rotting brains... they prefer to think a lot about fresh ones ;-). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:57 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? > Anyway the condition is not for the unconditioned to " exist " - which it > does, but for the inner conceptual entity not to appear consceptualy. > Without a clear perception of consciousness and its limitations there is > fragmentation and a part of consciousness speaks/writes as if it was the > ground itself. But what happens is that what is stated/felt to be the > subjective is a concept projected by the fragment. > -geo- If anything, the opposite is the case. What is stated/felt to be the *objective*, is a projection. The subjective is a result of this projection. But it works both ways, really. The introjected arises with the projected, and vice-versa. The observer is the observed. geo> There is no way to referr to it. The moment there is any attempt to referr to the subjective projection arises. This is what I meant with the first post above. Only what is seen is transcended. The perception of consciousness, is the silencing of consciousness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > geo> There is no way to referr to it. The moment there is any attempt to > referr to the subjective projection arises. This is what I meant with the > first post above. Only what is seen is transcended. The perception of > consciousness, is the silencing of consciousness. I don't know what that means, " the perception of consciousness " . The subjective is an introjection, not a projection. The objective is a projection. The two arise together. Projecting 'out there' creates 'in here', and introjecting 'in here' creates 'out there'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM > Re: Seeing Value > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > Geo - > > There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. > > Period. > > Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that > be, " is conditional. > > Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, > totality) is not sufficient for understanding. > > Only being is understanding. > > Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. > > The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. > > Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " > > Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply can't > touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. > > The conditional consciousness involves a center. > > The conditional conscious dies. > > In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is time. > > -- Dan -- > > Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? > -geo- It would only seem like that to someone existing in a conditional state, in which conditions were imposed from outside. -- Dan -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:11 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > geo> There is no way to referr to it. The moment there is any attempt to > referr to the subjective projection arises. This is what I meant with the > first post above. Only what is seen is transcended. The perception of > consciousness, is the silencing of consciousness. I don't know what that means, " the perception of consciousness " . The subjective is an introjection, not a projection. The objective is a projection. The two arise together. Projecting 'out there' creates 'in here', and introjecting 'in here' creates 'out there'. geo> Both in here and out there are conceptual. When there is the intent of " pointing " to the " ground " , immediatly the concept may arise. And I said MAY. Example: X says that ground is always what is. Y says that ground is always what is. And...both may not be saying the same. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > I don't know what that means, " the perception of consciousness " . > > The subjective is an introjection, not a projection. The objective is a > projection. The two arise together. Projecting 'out there' creates 'in > here', and introjecting 'in here' creates 'out there'. > > geo> Both in here and out there are conceptual. Everything we say here on this forum is conceptual. Why pick on 'in here' and 'out there' specifically? The concept " concept " is conceptual. Now that we've got that one out of the way... ;-). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > > > > > What occurs, occurs. > > > > > > What happens, happens. > > > > > > Including the above two postings. > > > > > > Not very interesting, not thrilling, but that is 'what is the case'. > > > > > > > D: Not very interesting, but worthy enough for a reply? > > P: Going to a graveyard and reading tombstones is more > interesting than reading these posts, and no one expects > a reply. But, on the other hand, tombstones don't > show up in my screen. I have to get my butt off this > chair and drive for miles. Why is it they build > graveyards so far away from where people live? Are they > afraid of death? Or what? Now that's an interesting > question ) > > > Hi Pete, I spent 4 years of highschool, next to a fairly large graveyard... maybe that's where my moroseness originates... ;-) As a Realtor, some folks wouldn't purchase a house if someone died in it, even if they hadn't died *in the house*... of course, violent death must be disclosed... as it is a *blighted* home. Some beautiful houses in Old Brooklyn area of Cleveland border on graveyards... Many wouldn't even drive down the street, let alone look at the houses. Some laughed and said, " at least the neighbors are quiet. " ... I love the full range of humans, experiencing...(most of the time.) Love, Anna Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:19 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM > Re: Seeing Value > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > Geo - > > There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. > > Period. > > Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that > be, " is conditional. > > Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, > totality) is not sufficient for understanding. > > Only being is understanding. > > Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. > > The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. > > Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " > > Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply > can't > touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. > > The conditional consciousness involves a center. > > The conditional conscious dies. > > In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is > time. > > -- Dan -- > > Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? > -geo- It would only seem like that to someone existing in a conditional state, in which conditions were imposed from outside. -- Dan -- Yes. The seeing of the conditioned, temporal, does not allow anything to be projected as " outside " . After all it is consciousness that projects the inner and outer concepts. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > geo > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:28 PM > Re: Re: Seeing Value > > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM > Re: Seeing Value > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > -geo- > > Geo - > > There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. > > Period. > > Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that > be, " is conditional. > > Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, > totality) is not sufficient for understanding. > > Only being is understanding. > > Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. > > The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. > > Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " > > Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply can't > touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. > > The conditional consciousness involves a center. > > The conditional conscious dies. > > In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is time. > > -- Dan -- > > Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? > Anyway the condition is not for the unconditioned to " exist " - which it > does, but for the inner conceptual entity not to appear consceptualy. You (the imaginary writer of the post) have predetermined the condition of " no arising of something I call the 'inner conceptual entity,' " which apparently sometimes arises and sometimes doesn't. And you prefer that it doesn't. Thus, you take the position of a conceptual entity that has preferences about what kind of conceptions arise or don't arise. You have an idea of an " inner conceptual entity " based on memory, because you've learned things about such an entity. And you determined it is better for it not to arise. Such a determination can only be made in the past by a fictitious conceptual entity. " What is " has no conditionality, and involves no attempt to prevent certain kinds of conceptions from arising. Please note, I'm not saying that it is wrong that you've taken the position of a conceptual entity deciding what kind of conceptual situations are better (those without an inner entity involved). I'm just pointing out that this is what appears to be arising, through the words you've shared about it. And the conceptual entity that doesn't want an " inner conceptual entity " to appear, or would prefer that it doesn't appear, is itself a transient image, devoid of any actual ability to make its preferences occur, and, in fact, devoid of any volition involved in its appearing (apparently ;-) and disappearing. > Without a clear perception of consciousness and its limitations there is > fragmentation and a part of consciousness speaks/writes as if it was the > ground itself. But what happens is that what is stated/felt to be the > subjective is a concept projected by the fragment. Your words lead me to question the kinds of powers you attribute to a " fragment. " Is there any really existing fragment anywhere, that has powers to do things - such as project something? - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:26 PM Re: Seeing Value Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > I don't know what that means, " the perception of consciousness " . > > The subjective is an introjection, not a projection. The objective is a > projection. The two arise together. Projecting 'out there' creates 'in > here', and introjecting 'in here' creates 'out there'. > > geo> Both in here and out there are conceptual. Everything we say here on this forum is conceptual. Why pick on 'in here' and 'out there' specifically? The concept " concept " is conceptual. Now that we've got that one out of the way... ;-). geo> Would not the seeing/understanding of the limitation of words do something about it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:26 PM > Re: Seeing Value > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > I don't know what that means, " the perception of consciousness " . > > > > The subjective is an introjection, not a projection. The objective is a > > projection. The two arise together. Projecting 'out there' creates 'in > > here', and introjecting 'in here' creates 'out there'. > > > > geo> Both in here and out there are conceptual. > > Everything we say here on this forum is conceptual. > > Why pick on 'in here' and 'out there' specifically? > > The concept " concept " is conceptual. > > Now that we've got that one out of the way... ;-). > > geo> Would not the seeing/understanding of the limitation of words do > something about it? Do something about what? Is somebody trying to make something appear, or something go away? If so, that 'somebody' is itself an appearance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 4, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:19 PM > Re: Seeing Value > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:17 PM > > Re: Seeing Value > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > Only when consciousness and its value and meaning is fully seen > > > presently...only then that which is beyond is. > > > -geo- > > > > Geo - > > > > There is no precondition for the unconditional to be. > > > > Period. > > > > Anything involving a pre-condition, like " only when this happens, can that > > be, " is conditional. > > > > Whatever word you want to use for the unconditional (awareness, nothing, > > totality) is not sufficient for understanding. > > > > Only being is understanding. > > > > Certainly not the ideas exchanged about it - the being only. > > > > The being, the awareness, the nothing - is unconditional. > > > > Thus, it has been referred to as " unborn. " > > > > Conditionality, conditional beings, conditional consciousness, simply > > can't > > touch, can't apprehend the unconditional being. > > > > The conditional consciousness involves a center. > > > > The conditional conscious dies. > > > > In a certain sense, conditional consciousness is death, because it is > > time. > > > > -- Dan -- > > > > Why are you imposing the condition of inconditionality? > > -geo- > > It would only seem like that to someone existing in a conditional state, in > which conditions were imposed from outside. > > -- Dan -- > > Yes. The seeing of the conditioned, temporal, does not allow anything to be > projected as " outside " . After all it is consciousness that projects the > inner and outer concepts. > -geo- And is there a real projector, somewhere, of concepts and perceptions? Or is " consciousness " also imagined and inferred? I'm bringing up this question not to try to be right or score a point. I'm bringing it up because perception changes when the assumption drops that anything is making it happen the way it is. As well as the assumption that someone somewhere knows what it is. Not that these assumptions (which are essentially versions of the same assumption) drop because of an act of will, or something made it drop. But that the assumption drops if it drops. And if it doesn't drop, then there is the attempt to maintain it. After all, believing there are things making other things happen, which could change the way things happen, is carried throughout the commonsense view of the world that is maintained through social conditioning of thought patterns through relationships and actions (rewarding certain types of thought/behavior patterns, punishing or ignoring others). -- Dan -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
